Dataset Information

Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimates of Glomerular Filtration Rate in Dapagliflozin Phase 3 Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

To compare estimated glomerular filtration rate measured by serum creatinine (eGFRcr) and serum cystatin C (eGFRcys) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus from dapagliflozin clinical trials.

Methods

Post hoc analysis of data pooled from 9 phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, 24-week trials of dapagliflozin. The correlation between eGFRcr and eGFRcys was modeled by a simple linear regression. The proportions of patients with eGFR 30 to <60 and ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) based on creatinine versus cystatin C were compared.

Results

Of 4745 total patients, 4294 (90.5%) had serum cystatin C data available for calculation of eGFRcys. The correlation between eGFRcr and eGFRcys was poor (R (2) = 30%). Of patients with eGFRcr 30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 66% had eGFR ≥60 when recalculated based on cystatin C. Among patients with eGFRcr ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 95.8% had eGFR ≥60 when estimated using cystatin C. Decreases in HbA1c, body weight, and systolic blood pressure with dapagliflozin were similar among patient subgroups defined by either eGFR estimate and were statistically significant and clinically meaningful with dapagliflozin 10 mg/day in most subgroups.

Conclusion

The correlation between eGFRcr and eGFRcys was poor. Renal function assessed by eGFRcr may be underestimated, and some patients may be misdiagnosed with chronic kidney disease and/or unjustifiably deemed ineligible for certain antidiabetes medications. This is in consonance with guidelines suggesting using eGFRcys as a confirmatory measure when eGFRcr is between 45 and <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) with no evidence of kidney damage and/or in other situations where eGFRcr may be unreliable.

Funding

AstraZeneca.

SUBMITTER: Mende C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4801818 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Estimates of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) that are based on serum creatinine are routinely used; however, they are imprecise, potentially leading to the overdiagnosis of chronic kidney disease. Cystatin C is an alternative filtration marker for estimating GFR.Using cross-sectional analyses, we developed estimating equations based on cystatin C alone and in combination with creatinine in diverse populations totaling 5352 participants from 13 studies. These equations were then validated in 1119 participants from 5 different studies in which GFR had been measured. Cystatin and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials.Mean measured GFRs were 68 and 70 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area in the development and validation data sets, respectively. In the validation data set, the creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations that used creatinine or cystatin C alone. Bias was similar among the three equations, with a median difference between measured and estimated GFR of 3.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the combined equation, as compared with 3.7 and 3.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the creatinine equation and the cystatin C equation (P=0.07 and P=0.05), respectively. Precision was improved with the combined equation (interquartile range of the difference, 13.4 vs. 15.4 and 16.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), respectively [P=0.001 and P<0.001]), and the results were more accurate (percentage of estimates that were >30% of measured GFR, 8.5 vs. 12.8 and 14.1, respectively [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). In participants whose estimated GFR based on creatinine was 45 to 74 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), the combined equation improved the classification of measured GFR as either less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) or greater than or equal to 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) (net reclassification index, 19.4% [P<0.001]) and correctly reclassified 16.9% of those with an estimated GFR of 45 to 59 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) as having a GFR of 60 ml or higher per minute per 1.73 m(2).The combined creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations based on either of these markers alone and may be useful as a confirmatory test for chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Project description:BackgroundWe recently published and validated the new serum creatinine (Scr)-based full-age-spectrum equation (FAS crea ) for estimating the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) for healthy and kidney-diseased subjects of all ages. The equation was based on the concept of normalized Scr and shows equivalent to superior prediction performance to the currently recommended equations for children, adolescents, adults and older adults.MethodsBased on an evaluation of the serum cystatin C (ScysC) distribution, we defined normalization constants for ScysC ( Q cysC = 0.82 mg/L for ages <70 years and Q cysC = 0.95 mg/L for ages ≥70 years). By replacing Scr/ Q crea in the FAS crea equation with ScysC/ Q cysC , or with the average of both normalized biomarkers, we obtained new ScysC-based (FAS cysC ) and combined Scr-/ScysC-based FAS equations (FAS combi ). To validate the new FAS cysC and FAS combi we collected data on measured GFR, Scr, ScysC, age, gender, height and weight from 11 different cohorts including n = 6132 unique white subjects (368 children, aged ≤18 years, 4295 adults and 1469 older adults, aged ≥70 years).ResultsIn children and adolescents, the new FAS cysC equation showed significantly better performance [percentage of patients within 30% of mGFR (P30) = 86.1%] than the Caucasian Asian Paediatric Adult Cohort equation (P30 = 76.6%; P < 0.0001), or the ScysC-based Schwartz equation (P30 = 68.8%; P < 0.0001) and the FAS combi equation outperformed all equations with P30 = 92.1% (P < 0.0001). In adults, the FAS cysC equation (P30 = 82.6%) performed equally as well as the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI cysC ) (P30 = 80.4%) and the FAS combi equation (P30 = 89.9%) was also equal to the combined CKD-EPI equation (P30 = 88.2%). In older adults, FAS cysC was superior (P30 = 88.2%) to CKD-EPI cysC (P30 = 84.4%; P < 0.0001) and the FAS combi equation (P30 = 91.2%) showed significantly higher performance than the combined CKD-EPI equation (P30 = 85.6%) (P < 0.0001).ConclusionThe FAS equation is not only applicable to all ages, but also for all recommended renal biomarkers and their combinations.

Project description:BackgroundEquations to estimate GFR have not been well validated in the elderly and may misclassify persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We measured GFR and compared the performance of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-Epi) and the Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) equations based on creatinine and/or cystatin C in octogenarians and nonagenarians.MethodsUsing cross-sectional analysis we assessed 95 very elderly persons (mean 85 years) living in the community. GFR was measured by iohexol (mGFR) and compared with estimates using six equations: MDRD, CKD-Epi_creatinine, CKD-Epi_cystatin, CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin, BIS_creatinine and BIS_creatinine-cystatin.ResultsMean mGFR was 55 (range,19-86) ml/min/1.73 m(2). Bias was smaller with the CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin and the CKD-Epi_creatinine equations (-4.0 and 1.7 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). Accuracy (percentage of estimates within 30% of mGFR) was greater with the CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin, BIS_creatinine-cystatin and BIS_creatinine equations (85%, 83% and 80%, respectively). Among the creatinine-based equations, the BIS_creatinine had the greatest accuracy at mGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and the CKD-Epi_creatinine was superior at higher GFRs (79% and 90%, respectively). The CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin, BIS_creatinine-cystatin and CKD-Epi_cystatin equations yielded the greatest areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve at GFR threshold = 60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 (0.88, 0.88 and 0.87, respectively). In participants classified based on the BIS_creatinine, CKD-Epi_cystatin, or BIS_creatinine-cystatin equations, the CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin equation tended to improve CKD classification (net reclassification index: 12.7%, p = 0.18; 6.7%, p = 0.38; and 15.9%; p = 0.08, respectively).ConclusionsGFR-estimating equations CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin and BIS_creatinine-cystatin showed better accuracy than other equations using creatinine or cystatin C alone in very elderly persons. The CKD-Epi_creatinine-cystatin equation appears to be advantageous in CKD classification. If cystatin C is not available, both the BIS_cr equation and the CKD-Epi_cr equation could be used, although at mGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), the BIS_cr equation seems to be the best alternative.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline recommends use of a cystatin C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to confirm creatinine-based eGFR between 45 and 59 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). Prior studies have demonstrated that comorbidities such as solid-organ transplant strongly influence the relationship between measured GFR, creatinine, and cystatin C. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of cystatin C-based eGFR equations compared with creatinine-based eGFR and measured GFR across different clinical presentations. METHODS:We compared the performance of the CKD-EPI 2009 creatinine-based estimated GFR equation (eGFRCr) and the newer CKD-EPI 2012 cystatin C-based equations (eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys) with measured GFR (iothalamate renal clearance) across defined patient populations. Patients (n = 1652) were categorized as transplant recipients (n = 568 kidney; n = 319 other organ), known chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (n = 618), or potential kidney donors (n = 147). RESULTS:eGFRCr-Cys showed the most consistent performance across different clinical populations. Among potential kidney donors without CKD [stage 2 or higher; eGFR >60 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1)], eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys demonstrated significantly less bias than eGFRCr; however, all 3 equations substantially underestimated GFR when eGFR was <60 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). Among transplant recipients with CKD stage 3B or greater [eGFR <45 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1)], eGFRCys was significantly more biased than eGFRCr. No clear differences in eGFR bias between equations were observed among known CKD patients regardless of eGFR range or in any patient group with a GFR between 45 and 59 mL · min(-1) · (1.73 m(2))(-1). CONCLUSIONS:The performance of eGFR equations depends on patient characteristics that are readily apparent on presentation. Among the 3 CKD-EPI equations, eGFRCr-Cys performed most consistently across the studied patient populations.